Archive for the ‘Donald Trump’ Category

Theres No Zealot Like a Trump Convert – The New York Times

Good evening from Milwaukee, where I had a relish tray last night. Today, Im looking at how the Republican National Convention has become a conversion story. Then, we zoom into a light-blue state where Republicans think they have a shot in November.

When Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio takes the stage in Milwaukee tonight to accept his partys nomination to be vice president, he will complete the final stage in his transformation from foil to acolyte of former President Donald Trump.

His long history of disparaging Trump, whom he has called an idiot and cultural heroin, does not make him less suited for elevation within his party. Rather, it makes him a better avatar for the tale Trump wants to tell.

Vance is a political convert, whose remaking of himself and his political image in order to thrive in Trumps Republican Party proves and reinforces Trumps power. And he will serve as a capstone for a convention that has been a conversion story unto itself.

Conversion is a defining feature of todays Republican Party, given how full it is of Republicans who did not much like Trump when he cannonballed into politics in 2016, and how far it has moved from the Reaganesque tenets that once defined it. The intraparty unity on display here is possible only because a lot of people have changed their minds about the former president over the past eight years. Trump himself, a former Democrat, has changed his politics, too.

Trump cares little about whether his converts are doing so for pragmatic reasons or moral ones, just as long as their fealty is public, and over the course of this week, Trump has paraded his converts for all the country to see.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

Link:
Theres No Zealot Like a Trump Convert - The New York Times

Opinion | Donald Trump, Man of Destiny – The New York Times

Every act of political violence yields instant reactions that cant be supported by the available facts.

A single assassination attempt by a loner with a rifle doesnt necessarily tell us anything about whether America is poised to plunge into a political abyss. Nor do the motives of would-be assassins necessarily map onto a given eras partisan divisions. Nor can we say definitively that this assassination attempt has sealed up the 2024 election for Donald Trump and his running mate, J.D. Vance surely the wild twists and turns of the Trump era should disabuse us of that kind of confidence.

Having lived through eight years of that era, though, I feel comfortable making one sweeping statement about the moments when Trump shifted his head fractionally and literally dodged a bullet, fell bleeding and then rose with his fist raised in an iconic image of defiance. The scene on Saturday night in Pennsylvania was the ultimate confirmation of his status as a man of destiny, a character out of Hegel or Thomas Carlyle or some other verbose 19th-century philosopher of history, a figure touched by the gods of fortune in a way that transcends the normal rules of politics.

In Hegels work, the great man of history is understood as a figure whose own particular aims involve those large issues which are the will of the World Spirit. Hegels paradigm was Napoleon, the Corsican adventurer whose quest for personal power and military glory spread the ideas of the French Revolution, shattered the old regimes of Europe and ushered in the modern age.

For Hegel the great mans role is a fundamentally progressive one. He is developing or revealing some heretofore hidden truth, pushing civilization toward its next stage of development, sometimes committing crimes or trampling sacred things but always in service to a higher aim, the unfolding intentions of a divine process.

In different ways in my own lifetime, American conservatism and liberalism placed Hegelian hopes in Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama, both figures who seemed to embody a grand optimistic vision of how the global future would unfold.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

Read more here:
Opinion | Donald Trump, Man of Destiny - The New York Times

Opinion | The Secret of Trumps Resurrection – The New York Times

In November 2022, after the Republicans lackluster showing in the midterms, I wrote a column titled Donald Trump Is Finally Finished. I keep a printed copy on my desk as a humbling reminder of how wrong I can be.

How did Trump go from a disgraced has-been even Fox Newss Laura Ingraham implied he was putting his own grudges ahead of whats good for the country to the man of destiny he had become even before he dodged that bullet on Saturday?

A simple explanation goes something like this: The G.O.P. ceased to be a normal political party in 2016 and became a cult of personality, less interested in winning elections than in burnishing the savior-victim myth of its charismatic leader. As a cult, the party could never realistically allow any other Republican to successfully challenge Trump for the nomination. And as a nominee, Trump would only gain strength once the extent of President Bidens mental decline became obvious.

But this analysis, true to a point, falls short in at least three respects. It doesnt give Trump the political credit he deserves. It fails to reckon with the Biden administrations political blunders. And it reduces the Democrats problem to a Biden problem. Their problem is bigger than that.

First, Trump. Just as Barack Obama knew that he stood for hope, Trump knows that he stands for defiance. Defiance of what, or whom? Of the gatekeepers to cultural respectability in todays America. And who, in the minds of Trump supporters, are they?

They are the reporters who said it was a conspiracy theory to suggest Covid emerged from a Chinese lab. Or the academic deans who insist every job applicant write D.E.I. statements and refuse to hire those who criticize them. Or the do-gooders who charge that Americans who want better control of the southern border are motivated by racism. Or the pundits who say, as one NBC contributor put it in 2016, that 100 percent of Trump voters are deplorable. Or the journalists who claimed that inflation is good for you.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

View post:
Opinion | The Secret of Trumps Resurrection - The New York Times

Opinion | What if We Learn Nothing About the Man Who Shot Donald Trump? – The New York Times

Eleven of the last 12 American presidents have endured an assassination attempt or a plot against their lives. The same is true for 20 of the countrys 45.

Most of the recent plots have been foiled early, making the indelible image of Donald Trump fist-pumping in Pennsylvania seem like an atavistic monument or an ominous portent or perhaps both. In the bedtime-story version of our national mythology, the country left behind the violence and disorder of the 1960s decades ago, for what turned out to be a wobbly but enduring peaceful equilibrium, one whose veneer began to crack only recently, with violent rhetoric rekindling over the past decade especially prominently on the right. But as David Dayen noted in The American Prospect the day after the shooting, in the 1970s Gerald Ford was shot at, and in the 1980s Ronald Reagan was actually shot; in both Bill Clintons and Barack Obamas presidencies, shots were fired at the White House.

Not all of these attempts were serious, but if amateur marksmanship and a chance gust of wind are what spared Donald Trumps life last Saturday, similar vicissitudes might have ended Fords or Reagans, as well, in which case we would all be telling very different stories about the past 50 years of American history. And though we may describe the stochastic terror of the past decade in terms of ugly bumper stickers and reckless speeches, there has been real violence, not just incitement. Gabrielle Giffords was, in fact, shot and almost killed; Steve Scalise, too.

America is staring into the abyss, The Financial Times declared in the aftermath of Saturdays shooting, but often we see chaos around the corner as a way of telling ourselves it hasnt already arrived. No political party, movement, ideology or manner of thinking has had an absolute monopoly on this violence, and it really hasnt mattered whether the surrounding political atmosphere was aggressive or docile, Dayen wrote. In our messy reality, political violence exists as a background hum. Already, it seems, the assassination attempt has faded from the news, having hardly made a mark on the shape of the presidential race or, beyond a few ear bandages worn in showy solidarity, on the Republican National Convention that almost immediately followed.

Its not even clear whether it is right to call last weekends shooting an act of political violence. The attempted assassination produced only a brief flare of partisan meaning, though the motive was never clear. The gunman was a registered Republican and recognizably a conservative to classmates but not, it seems, an especially active or outraged political actor and had not left much of a memorable ideological impression on those who knew him. He apparently donated $15 to a progressive organization in 2021, and as OSINT sleuths and self-deputized detectives argued about it over the weekend, it was striking to think how much meaning seemed to hang on a donation the size of a trip to Starbucks. When no obvious partisan explanation was immediately found, we simply moved on.

Perhaps a motive will become clearer in the days ahead. But for now, there is not much more to go on, and it seems likeliest that the would-be assassin remains a kind of cipher. Like the Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock before him, Thomas Crooks briefly tore a rupture in the fabric of American reality, only to fill the space with a kind of silence, a mute biography and an unstated philosophy a peculiarly American kind of terrorism in which the act of violence does not call attention to a cause greater than the shooter or generate a politically strategic backlash. Instead, it briefly elevates the profile of the man with the gun.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

More:
Opinion | What if We Learn Nothing About the Man Who Shot Donald Trump? - The New York Times

Historians See Echoes of 1968 in Trump Assassination Attempt – TIME

Former President Donald Trump was named the Republican presidential nominee at the partys convention this week, just days after surviving an assassination attempt at a campaign rally on July 13.

How the assassination attempt affects Trumps chances of reelection remains to be seen, but its not the first time that violence has roiled a major presidential election year.

In 1968, two beloved figures in U.S. society were assassinated just two months apart: civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. on April 4, 1968, and Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy on June 5, 1968. That was five years after Kennedys brother, John F. Kennedy, the nations first Catholic president, had been assassinated on Nov. 22, 1963. In response, uprisings popped up across major U.S. cities, adding to a general climate of unrest, between worldwide student and labor strikes and demonstrations against the Vietnam War, which was growing increasingly unpopular. Thousands of anti-war protesters descended on Chicago for the August 1968 Democratic National Convention (DNC), railing against the partys nominee Vice President Hubert Humphrey, who stood by President Lyndon B. Johnsons moves to escalate the war.

Historians tell TIME that there are some echoes of 1968 in terms of whats going on in America now versus then, but also some key differences.

Kennedys assassination shook up the 1968 presidential race. He was anti-war and one of the few Democratic candidates who was popular among both black voters and white working class voters, says Maurice Isserman, a professor of History at Hamilton College and expert on the 1960s social movements whose latest book is Reds: The Tragedy of American Communism. His assassination by Sirhan Sirhan, which came so quickly after King was killed, rattled the nation, and came at a time when there were increasing acts of violence on both the right and the left, building occupations, street confrontations.

You can say that Sirhan Sirhan might very well have changed history by successfully assassinating Robert Kennedy, preventing him from being the Democratic nominee and likely prevailing in the fall, Isserman argues.

Trumps assassination attempt will not have the same effect, he argues: This latest attempt was just that. It was an attempt. It was not successful, and it won't change history. While the attempt will bolster Trumps popularity, he says voters should remember that the Republican party has, since 2015, been building up a climate in which expressions citing violence have become the norm. On Saturday, the chickens came home to roost, as some clearly very disturbed young man, a registered Republican, decided to make his place in history by attempting to assassinate Donald Trump.

But the existential crisis, the feeling that democracy is under siege, is a similarity between 1968 and 2024.

People are feeling like the country is coming apart at the seams. That's exactly how it felt in 1968, says Barbara A. Perry, a Professor of Presidential Studies at the University of Virginias Miller Center and co-editor of The Presidency: Facing Constitutional Crossroads. In 1968, voters saw the violence in the streets and voted for Richard Nixon because of a sense that he would bring peace and law and order back to our country.

As with today, war was a top political issue in 1968. Perry likens the anti-Vietnam war protests to the campus protests sparked by the Israel-Hamas war in 2024. But Lindsay M. Chervinsky, presidential historian and author of the forthcoming Making the Presidency: John Adams and the Precedents That Forged the Republic, points out that the Gaza and Vietnam demonstrations are on different scales. The Vietnam War protests were much more all-encompassing in society because there was a draft."

Michael Kazin, a professor of History at Georgetown University and author of What It Took to Win: A History of the Democratic Party, agrees that the Gaza protests have not divided the Democratic Party as much as the Vietnam War did, arguing, If it did, you wouldn't have people like Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez, Bernie Sanders, and Ilhan Omar supporting Joe Biden.

Kazin, who was a member of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), one of the leftist groups protesting at the Chicago DNC in 1968, says one similarity between the conventions is dissatisfaction with the nominee. And it remains to be seen whether the assassination attempt will persuade undecided voters to pick Trump or Biden.

In 1968, there was a rise in youth political activism. There were calls for revolution, and leftist groups like the Black Panther party were rising up against the police. According to Chervinsky, In 1968 there was this question about generational turnoverwas it time for a new generation, or were the existing leaders going to continue to lead? There were all of these grassroots movementscivil rights, antiwar movementsand there have been a lot of those similar things in the last several years.

There's always been partisan division, since there have been political parties. It is, at times, much more strident, and that is something we're seeing now.

So how did America move on from the tumultuous year of 1968?

Perry says Americans turned to the ballot box. After Nixon resigned over the Watergate scandal, his successor Fords controversial pardon of Nixon, and Carters unpopular one-term presidency, Perry thinks Americans found hope again in movie star Ronald Reagan, who was elected President in 1980 and served two terms 1981-1989.

How do we get that mojo back? Its Ronald Reagan, says Perry. His running for reelection in 84 with the It's morning again in America ad is positive. If you look at Gallup polls back then, there is a burst upward of Americans positive approval about federal government.

Other historians argue that were still living in 1968. Many of the conflicts in the 60s are still with us, especially cultural onesabortion, gay rights, feminism, racism, says Kazin. As Isserman puts it, We're still very much living in the shadow of the 60s.

More:
Historians See Echoes of 1968 in Trump Assassination Attempt - TIME